John Brown's extended fitting out basin

[Andy F]

Very sadly, just what remains of the shipyard, the very place that was extended for QE2's bulbous bow :

https://www.flickr.com/photos/prondis_in_kenya/2921599347/

It was such a poignant visit -- but it is wonderful to have seen the place of her birth!

or should that be the place of her 'berth'? 

[Bob C.]

Very sadly, just what remains of the shipyard, the very place that was extended for QE2's bulbous bow :

IP, Are you sure that the cutout was built for QE2?  I want to say I've seen it there before her construction.  Not that I don't believe you but do you have a reference for the claim?  I'll have to look at pictures of other jobs at JB.

Cheers!

[Isabelle Prondzynski]

What you say makes a lot of sense, as we too were wondering why QE2 would have needed greater length in her berth than her older (and longer) sisters.

I'd be very interested in pictures taken at the time. Thank you!

[Rob Lightbody]

IP, Are you sure that the cutout was built for QE2?  I want to say I've seen it there before her construction.  Not that I don't believe you but do you have a reference for the claim?  I'll have to look at pictures of other jobs at JB.

Cheers!

The source for that claim, I think, is my Dad who worked at John Browns and told me this so if you tell me he was wrong i'll not speak to you again!

*OR* he told me it was for QE1, and my young mind might have got confused and thought they were one and the same. 

One possibility is that QE2 had a bulbous bow, and QE1 really didn't, so it would have extended far further forward at/below the waterline than her predecessors, although she was a good bit shorter... i'd like confirmation one way or another.

[Bob C.]

As part of my search for the notch mystery, I found these pictures (and possible a new feature) on Google images.

Note:  link no longer active

[Bob C.]

Not there in 1909...

[Bob C.]

OK, finally found proof!  Had to go to British Pathe (love that webpage) and filter through some of the still shots of the videos to find it.  Found a lot of other great stuff along the way which I'll share later. Anyway If you look at the photo of Queen Mary being fitted out in 1936 you can barely make out the notch (needs a higher camera elevation).  I will have to find a better photo to conclude the notch existed then BUT looking at the second photo of the launching of the oil tanker BRITISH TRADER at John Brown in early 1957, you can clearly see the notch.  Given that QE2 was maybe a fleeting thought at that point (the Queens replacement question arose in Dec 1958) and it would be 10 years until she occupied that berth, I think the theory of the notch being built to accomodate Mary and/or Elizabeth makes sense given the photos I've seen of the amount of the stern of these two ships extending into the Clyde. 

That was fun.  Didn't get any work done for the last 2 hrs but it was fun... 

[Rob Lightbody]

Impressive research!  Well done!!

In that case i'm going to assume it was for QE1, which I presume was the longest ship they ever built there ?  There's another question for you to find the answer to!

[Isabelle Prondzynski]

Yes, excellent -- those pictures are very clear!

Amazing to see again the fabulous history that has accumulated over many decades in that single place... it did have an aura about it when we went to see it in October. Next time, it will be a visit to the top of the Titan crane!

... and yes, this Forum is so much more fun than (most) work   

[Bob C.]

Impressive research!  Well done!!

In that case i'm going to assume it was for QE1, which I presume was the longest ship they ever built there ?  There's another question for you to find the answer to!

I think it's safe to say that QE was the longest and biggest ship built at John Brown (and later names of the same place).  She was 1031 ft long and 118 ft wide.  Queen Mary is 1019.5 ft long and also 118 ft wide.  To say QE is the largest liner ever built begs the Ocean Liner versus Cruise Ship debate. QE was the biggest liner as she was larger than anything in her time or before, even bigger than SS France (although France was longer - 1035 ft) because of France's 110 ft breadth.  The floating boxes of today are much, much bigger but are in no way ocean liners.  Dare I do it?  Dare I call QM2 a liner?  I think she is because of her design and construction but she is certainly not part of the same tradition as QE2 and her ancestors, IMHO.  I could go on but I think I have probably upset someone by now so I'll back off.     

[Stowaway2k]

My visit to John Brown's

A Sunday afternoon in May 2006
Note:  Link removed as not working

[Rob Lightbody]

Yes, that last link from STV from Kyle is absolutely knock-out.

[Fairfield]

OK, finally found proof!  Had to go to British Pathe (love that webpage) and filter through some of the still shots of the videos to find it.  Found a lot of other great stuff along the way which I'll share later. Anyway If you look at the photo of Queen Mary being fitted out in 1936 you can barely make out the notch (needs a higher camera elevation).  I will have to find a better photo to conclude the notch existed then BUT looking at the second photo of the launching of the oil tanker BRITISH TRADER at John Brown in early 1957, you can clearly see the notch.  Given that QE2 was maybe a fleeting thought at that point (the Queens replacement question arose in Dec 1958) and it would be 10 years until she occupied that berth, I think the theory of the notch being built to accomodate Mary and/or Elizabeth makes sense given the photos I've seen of the amount of the stern of these two ships extending into the Clyde. 

That was fun.  Didn't get any work done for the last 2 hrs but it was fun...

Here's a John Brown photo of Queen Mary fitting out from my collection but not too clear about the basin notch.

[Clydebuilt2]

OK, finally found proof!  Had to go to British Pathe (love that webpage) and filter through some of the still shots of the videos to find it.  Found a lot of other great stuff along the way which I'll share later. Anyway If you look at the photo of Queen Mary being fitted out in 1936 you can barely make out the notch (needs a higher camera elevation).  I will have to find a better photo to conclude the notch existed then BUT looking at the second photo of the launching of the oil tanker BRITISH TRADER at John Brown in early 1957, you can clearly see the notch.  Given that QE2 was maybe a fleeting thought at that point (the Queens replacement question arose in Dec 1958) and it would be 10 years until she occupied that berth, I think the theory of the notch being built to accomodate Mary and/or Elizabeth makes sense given the photos I've seen of the amount of the stern of these two ships extending into the Clyde. 

That was fun.  Didn't get any work done for the last 2 hrs but it was fun...

Here's a John Brown photo of Queen Mary fitting out from my collection but not too clear about the basin notch.

Great photo Bob, thanks for sharing!
Clydebuilt2

[Lynda Bradford]

It is a good photo and you really get an indication of the size of the ship.  The workmen look so small in comparison.

[cunardqueen]

Heres a few more.

[Bob van Leeuwen]

I don't know where I left it, but I came across a photograph of the Queen Mary during construction that also showed the notch in place, might have been on my old laptop which died, will flick to the photographs on my iPad to see if I can find it again, I might have stored it on there.

[Bob van Leeuwen]

Just did a quick search and found the picture in question